alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Amtsblatt C 320A/27.

| | ISSN 1977-088X |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 320A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 60. Jahrgang27. September 2017 |

ISSN 1977-088X

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 320A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

60. Jahrgang27. September 2017

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Berichtigungen |
| 2017/C 320 A/01 | Berichtigung der GD Justiz und Verbraucher — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union) COM/2017/10374 ( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 ) | 1 |
| 2017/C 320 A/02 | Berichtigung der GD Beschäftigung, Soziales und Integration — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union) COM/2017/10375 ( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 ) | 2 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

Berichtigungen

2017/C 320 A/01

Berichtigung der GD Justiz und Verbraucher — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union) COM/2017/10374 ( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 )

( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 )

1

2017/C 320 A/02

Berichtigung der GD Beschäftigung, Soziales und Integration — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union) COM/2017/10375 ( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 )

( ABl. C 271 A vom 17.8.2017 )

2

---

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE

---

Berichtigungen

| 27.9.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | CA 320/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2017

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

CA 320/1

---

Berichtigung der GD Justiz und Verbraucher — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union) COM/2017/10374

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 271 A vom 17. August 2017
  )

(2017/C 320 A/01)

Seite 4 „Bewerbungsschluss“ Absatz 1:

Anstatt:

„Bewerbungsschluss ist der 29. September 2017, 12.00 Uhr (mittags) Brüsseler Zeit; danach ist keine Online-Anmeldung mehr möglich.“

muss es heißen:

muss es heißen

„Bewerbungsschluss ist der 13. Oktober 2017, 12.00 Uhr (mittags) Brüsseler Zeit; danach ist keine Online-Anmeldung mehr möglich.“

---

| 27.9.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | CA 320/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2017

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

CA 320/2

---

Berichtigung der GD Beschäftigung, Soziales und Integration — Ausschreibung einer Direktorenstelle (AD 14) — Brüssel (Artikel 29 Absatz 2 des Statuts der Beamten der Europäischen Union)

COM/2017/10375

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 271 A vom 17. August 2017
  )

(2017/C 320 A/02)

Seite 8, „Bewerbungsschluss“, Absatz 1:

Anstatt:

„Bewerbungsschluss ist der 29. September 2017, 12.00 Uhr (mittags) Brüsseler Zeit; danach ist keine Online-Anmeldung mehr möglich.“

muss es heißen:

muss es heißen

„Bewerbungsschluss ist der 13. Oktober 2017, 12.00 Uhr (mittags) Brüsseler Zeit; danach ist keine Online-Anmeldung mehr möglich.“

---
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U** **.** **S.C.
      SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Annual Report of Creative Vistas, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB for fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sayan
      Navaratnam, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuan t to 18
      U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:




1. The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




2. The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




*By:*
            */s/ Sayan
              Navaratnam***
            Sayan
              Navaratnam**
            *Chairman
                and Chief Executive Officer*








April
      17,
      2006
1817.

#### Manning *v.*The State.

Russell, J.

A mad dog is a public enemy; and to shoot at a mad dog is. not the wilful and wanton firing of a weapon, within the terms of the act of 1898 (Acts of 1898, p. 107), which forbids the shooting of firearms on Sunday. It is the duty of the court, upon the trial of one charged with a violation of this statute, to instruct the jury as to the meaning of the words “wilful and wanton,” as used in the statute; and it is error to restrict the defense of the accused to cases of actual self-defense or defense of property. It is for the jury to determine whether shooting at-a mad dog on Sunday is a wilful and wanton shooting, within the mean*241ing of tlie statute, although they might believe that the dog was fleeing at the time he was shot at, and that neither the defendant’s person nor his property was in danger. *Judgment reversed.*

Accusation of shooting on Sunday, from city court of Montieello — Judge Thurman. March 16, 1909.

Submitted May 4, —

Decided May 18, 1909.

The only evidence introduced was, in substance, that the accused was seen to get out of his buggy in a road in Jasper county on a specified Sunday and go to the side of the road and fire his pistol, and that when asked what he had shot at, he said “a mad dog.” In the motion for a new trial it was alleged, that the verdict was without evidence to support it, and that the court erred in charging the jury that if the accused shot on Sunday, not in defense of person or property, they should find him guilty; and erred in not charging that in order to convict, they must find that he fired the pistol wilfully and wantonly, and in not defining the words “wilfully” and “wantonly.”

*Greene F. Johnson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Doyle Campbell, solicitor,*contra.
Exhibit 32.1

AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.  Certification of the Chief Executive Officer  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code

The undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Axcelis Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, hereby certifies, for the
purposes of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code (as implemented by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) as follows:

This
Form 10-K annual report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and the
information contained herein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certification as of March 11, 2015.

/s/ MARY G. PUMA Mary G. Puma Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of
Axcelis Technologies, Inc.


---



QuickLinks
**Exhibit 31.1**
  I, David R. Guyer, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EyetechPharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transitioninstructions contained in SEC Release 34-47986]  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   Date: August 13, 2004 /s/ David R. Guyer, M.D.   David R. Guyer, M.D. Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)
Nevada                                                          Nevada
1048



                            NEVER MISS A CALL, INC.
                Incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada
                          25,000,000 Shares Authorized


                                       SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS

                                                CUSIP 641520 10 1


THIS CERTIFIES that




is the owner of

  FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK $.001 PAR VALUE OF

                            NEVER MISS A CALL, INC.

Transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or
by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly
endorsed. This certificate is not valid unless countersigned by the Transfer
Agent and registered by the Registrar.
WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of
its duly authorized officers.


                             NEVER MISS A CALL, INC.

                                    CORPORATE

                                      SEAL

                                      1999

                                     NEVADA

/s/                                                          /s/
-------------------                                          -------------------
SECRETARY                                                    PRESIDENT
H.P., Mother of S.P., a Child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2718

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 20, 2018

Ryan Thomas Truskoski, of Ryan Thomas Truskoski, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant.

Kelley Schaeffer, of Department of Children and Families, Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, for Appellee.

Thomasina Moore, Director of Appeals, and Sara E. Goldfarb, of Guardian ad Litem Program, Tallahassee, and Carrington Madison Mead, of Law Office of Carrington Madison Mead, Jacksonville, for Guardian ad Litem Program.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

COHEN, C.J., LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Roderick C. HALLMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3568

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 8, 2019

Candice K. Brower, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Osterhaus, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
Jake WHEELESS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4673

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 21, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Archie F. Gardner, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Wolf, Makar, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_science(9)
              - products_publications(35)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_image(12)
              - multimedia_image-141771(7)
              - multimedia_image-141775(5)
              - multimedia_video(5)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149194(2)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_other_news(4)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)
              - other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - alaska(7)
              - arizona(2)
              - arkansas(2)
              - california(48)
              - colorado(1)
              - florida(2)
              - georgia(1)
              - hawaii(4)
              - idaho(1)
              - louisiana(4)
              - maryland(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(1)
              - montana(1)
              - north carolina(1)
              - oklahoma(2)
              - oregon(2)
              - south carolina(1)
              - south dakota(1)
              - tennessee(2)
              - texas(3)
              - virginia(2)
              - washington(13)
              - west virginia(2)
              - (-)wyoming(2)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        November 16, 2022        Landslides in Wyoming: Work, challenges, and case studies

Presentations and Events        November 18, 2021        PubTalk-11/2021: Busting Myths About One of the Largest Volcanic Systems in the World - The Top 10 Misconceptions about Yellowstone Volcanism
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_science(6)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(75)
              - products_software(1)
              - products_web_tools(2)
              - multimedia_audio(1)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(4)
              - multimedia_image-141771(3)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_video(5)
              - multimedia_video-149194(2)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - news_news-149245(3)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(3)

## By Location

              - arizona(1)
              - california(1)
              - colorado(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new mexico(1)
              - (-)oregon(1)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - south dakota(1)
              - washington(1)

## By Year

Illustrations        June 17, 2022        Installing natural infrastructure can impact the water and carbon budgets of dryland streams and watersheds
|   | (1)The      report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2)The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                          |                          |                  |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------|
| Dated:      September 3, 2008 | By:                 | /s/      Ren Hu  |
|                          | Ren      Hu                   |
|                          | Chief      Accounting Officer |
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-18-00156-CV

____________________

IN THE INTEREST OF M.F.S., M.F.S., AND A.F.S.

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 418th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 17-03-03917-CV

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

The trial court clerk informed the Court that no arrangements have been made 

to pay for the District Clerk to prepare the clerk’s record. On July 16, 2018, we 

warned the appellants that their appeal could be dismissed unless they established

that they had arranged to pay the fee required to obtain the record with the clerk, or 

they filed a motion explaining why they needed additional time. On July 25, 2018, 

we affirmed the trial court’s order granting the court reporter’s contest to the 

appellants’ statements claiming they were unable to afford to pay costs. See Tex. R. 

Civ. P. 145(g). 
2

There being no satisfactory explanation for the appellants’ failure to pay the 

filing fee for the appeal and failure to file the clerk’s record that is relevant to their 

appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 

42.3.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 ________________________________

 HOLLIS HORTON

Justice

 

Submitted on August 29, 2018

Opinion Delivered August 30, 2018

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: FRD

Filters

              - multimedia_image(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1)

## By Location

## By Year

              - (-)2022(1)

Photography  Fredericksburg Geomagnetic Observatory
Bonnie Sue BOTTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2410

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 12, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_education(2)
              - science_science(13)
              - products_publications(81)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_image(35)
              - multimedia_image-141771(34)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_video(11)
              - multimedia_video-149194(4)
              - multimedia_video-149195(7)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - news_news-149246(2)
              - news_news-149248(4)
              - (-)news_news-149250(3)
              - news_other_news(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(2)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(4)
              - florida(4)
              - georgia(4)
              - idaho(1)
              - illinois(1)
              - (-)louisiana(3)
              - maryland(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(2)
              - nevada(1)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new york(2)
              - north carolina(5)
              - ohio(1)
              - oregon(2)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south carolina(4)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(5)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - washington(2)

## By Year

Featured Story        August 22, 2016        Fighting the Floods

Featured Story        September 2, 2016        Documenting the Deluge: USGS Teams Search South Louisiana to Determine Recent Flood’s Highest Peak

Featured Story        May 31, 2018        USGS Hurricane Response Met Challenges in 2017, Prepares for 2018
[Cite as State v. White, 2014-Ohio-1691.]

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO 

BUTLER COUNTY 

STATE OF OHIO, : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2013-09-167 

: D E C I S I O N

 - vs - 4/21/2014 

: 

 

COREY A. WHITE, : 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 

Case No. CR2013-04-0539 

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Government Services Center, 315 

High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee 

Charles M. Conliff, P.O. Box 18424, Fairfield, Ohio 45018-0424, for defendant-appellant 

 Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of 

the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the 

Butler County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel. 

{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Corey A. White, has filed a brief with this court 

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) indicates that 

a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the 
Butler CA2013-09-167

trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be 

predicated; (2) lists seven potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal," Anders at 

744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently to 

determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement of 

appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant 

on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both the brief 

and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant. 

{¶ 3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having 

been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to 

appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant 

requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that 

it is wholly frivolous. 

S. POWELL, P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30162

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LEVAY BALLET, also known as Pookie,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CR-329-11-T

--------------------

August 20, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Levay Ballet appeals following his guilty-plea conviction

and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute

cocaine base. He argues that, because the indictment did not

specify a quantity of cocaine base, his sentence of 161 months’

imprisonment was in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

466 (2000). Ballet’s sentence was below the statutory maximum

set out in the default sentencing provision for cocaine in 21
No. 01-30162

-2-

U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C), and his argument is without merit. See

United States v. Clinton, 256 F.3d 311, 314 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 122 S. Ct. 492 (2001).

AFFIRMED.